"Since this site obviously hasn't got the testicular courage to post my last comment, and probably not this one, but I'll give you my email address and you can contact me there and I'd be pleased to tell you all you need to know about me.
(email address removed)
*I must be missing something here? His previous comment WAS the LAST POST, and I responded to it, line by line?
_______________________________________________________________________
The question I have now regards the last sentence. Before me is an invitation to meet with the man who is the editor of a web site that promotes hatred and mistrust, and writes that civil disobedience is an acceptable form of protest against the "tyranny" that is the Ontario government.
(On a side note; I assume PK has never lived anywhere outside of Canada, for, if he had, he may understand that the use of the word "tyranny" is a gross exaggeration. Syria, Lybia, life with cartels, are all qualified examples of REAL tyranny.)
So, is more hatred and lies what this debate needs? Of course not. Not even Jane Wilson, the leader of WCO agrees with his position. That's an area where both sides of this debate can agree, calmer solutions need to prevail. Without it, threats of personal injury and property damage will be what drives this artificial debate.
Between the use of firearms, arson, vandalism, personal threats, threats of legal action, and damage to property, there is a manipulation going on that is designed to control this debate through the use of fear and intimidation. No debate has ever been solved equitably, when the threat of violence is used as a bargaining chip.
I personally know of supporters who have had acts of violence perpetrated against them. As well as threats, they've had damaged vehicles, and been heckled and ridiculed in public, with the children present in a shallow attempt to get them to back off their support of renewable energy. How does this foster an open line of communication?
Yet this group continues to try to paint the GEA as the perpetrator of this discontent. When someone needs to stoop to the levels mentioned above, they effectively give up their position, and credibility on the matter at hand. You may have (but, not in this case) all the right answers, but if you punch somebody first, they'll never hear what you have to say.
So it's time for this group of citizens to stop acting like spoiled children, who know nothing better then temper tantrums, and ask themselves, if this was how their kids acted at school, would they except it?
No comments:
Post a Comment